Dario Taraborelli <dtarabore...@wikimedia.org> writes: > *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game*. > (per GerardM) there's absolutely no doubt this model is effective at > creating a large volume of high-quality edits, and value to the project and > communities.
I agree on these interfaces, but at least in my use of them, and that of the other people I know who use them, the 'gamification' part is a red herring and not why we use them: the important part is the interface and its functionality. The confusing point/leaderboard system (which I never check) isn't really a draw, but the tools are actually useful to do things that are tedious otherwise, and at least somewhat enjoyable to use. It's useful that it tries to find e.g. new articles that might match an existing Wikidata topic but are unlinked, and presents side-by-side information that helps quickly eliminate some false positives, with a fast interface where you just press '1', '2', or '3' on the keyboard to move on. So a different way of looking at this category is: interfaces to make microcontributions non-tedious, and easy to curate in a "dashboard-style" way. Those interfaces might or might not have some gamification layer too, but I don't think that's the important part. Best, Mark -- Mark J. Nelson The MetaMakers Institute Falmouth University http://www.kmjn.org _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
